Re: perf top -z not working?

[Chulmin Kim <cmkim@core.kaist.ac.kr>]

2012-10-22 오후 11:13, Chulmin Kim 쓴 글:
> 2012-10-22 오후 11:10, Ryan Johnson 쓴 글:
>> On 22/10/2012 9:12 AM, David Ahern wrote:
>>> On 10/22/12 5:50 AM, Ryan Johnson wrote:
>>>>>>> It seems that `perf top -z' does not behave as advertized, at
>>>>>>> least not on the 3.2.0-25 kernel (Ubuntu) that I'm running. The
>>>>>>> man page states that it should "zero history across display
>>>>>>> updates" but the counts still seem to accumulate (the total
>>>>>>> samples reported rises monotonically) and processes still show up
>>>>>>> in the display long after they have exited. Pressing `z' or `Z'
>>>>>>> seems to have no effect, either.
>>>>> Are you using the --tui or --stdio interface? Try with both and
>>>>> check if
>>>>> it works in one of them, I bet the problem is with --tui.
>>>> --stdio does the same, so I'll have to try updating my kernel like
>>>> Chulmin suggested (haven't had time to do that yet)
>>>
>>> The kernel has nothing to do with the feature. From builtin-top.c,
>>> this part is either not happening or more likely not happening
>>> correctly.
>>>
>>>     if (top->zero)
>>>         symbol__annotate_zero_histogram(symbol, top->sym_evsel->idx);
>>>     else
>>>         symbol__annotate_decay_histogram(symbol, top->sym_evsel->idx);
>>>
>>> I recall it working recently - last year or so. Can you try
>>> different versions -- say 3.0, 3.2, 3.4 and latest? If you have a
>>> copy of Linus' tree or Arnaldo's git tree it should not take much time.
>> Chulmin says his 3.0 version works. My 3.2.18 doesn't. I don't have a
>> copy of the git tree on that machine, but I'll try building 3.4.x and
>> tip when I get a chance. I have never built perf-tools before,
>> though, so I'd appreciate tips on what might be different for
>> building perf-tools compared to the kernel, and how to avoid building
>> the standard kernel along the way. Hopefully it's just
>> configure-make-install?
>>
>
> How about checking your "top" version first?
>
> According to David's suggestion, it is the matter of top version.
>
> Mine was 3.2.8. (top --version).
>
>

Forget this message. My misunderstanding. :)


>
>
>> Regards,
>> Ryan
>>